From: Andres Zeller (azeller@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sat Jul 29 2000 - 02:16:15 GMT-3
Some people would say that dlsw is much more forgiving of network delays, and
problems, and that it can recover from some errored or dropped packets better
than a bridged protocol. Local ack, can be used to spoof the fep replies to a P
U,
and eliminate any problems caused by slow WAN connections (yes I know it can
cause even bigger problems ). In my experience source route bridging is typical
ly
slower by a factor of 3 on a 64k link, than SRB.
In response to the original questin, it would depend on how R4 was configured,
obviously if you were bridging between the ring and the interface where the sdl
c
frames were being delivered on R3 your assumption would be correct, but unless
you pass those frames from one segment to the other, on R4, your antagonist is
correct.
Andres Zeller
mark salmon wrote:
> Forgive my question but what is the point of using DLSw when you can use
> SRB (or SRT)?
>
> Greg Schmitt wrote:
> >
> > Greetings,
> >
> > Someone just told me that you can not do the following scenario with DLSW+.
> > He said that you would not have connectivity from systems attached to the
> > token ring on R1 to systems attached to the token ring on R4. I disagree.
> > Comments?
> >
> > tokenring R1 dlsw+ R2 tokenring R3 dlsw+ R4 tokenring
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Greg Schmitt
> >
> > Internetwork Solutions Engineer
> > ThruPoint, Inc. (formerly Total Network Solutions)
> > Voice: 410-349-9772
> > Cell: 443-822-5183
> > Pager: 888-773-0423 or pager.gschmitt@thrupoint.net
> > e-mail: GSchmitt@thrupoint.net
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:23:59 GMT-3